All that needs to happen (and I said it on the match thread) is that Referees need to be told to make decisions only if they are 100% sure. Yesterday there was no way Madely could have been 100% sure if Antonio had tripped Loftus-Cheek or whether it was inside or outside the area, thus meaning he must have "guessed" and got it wrong, and that's what is unacceptable.

If a Referee makes an error by "not" giving something then fine I can accept that to an extent. Like last weeks "foul" on Randolph, I didn't see that first time on the TV so I can understand how the Ref missed it, and if he missed it he can't give it. However yesterday he guessed and blew it,.

It doesn't always work in rugby and has sometimes created its own problems. Not sure.But the system doesn't work at the moment, so anything that improves it, even if it is imperfect, would be better than the existing reliance on refs being biased by crowds and big money clubs.

Lots of problems with the introduction of such systems disruption of play being the biggest.

But if you were to at least try it with penalties it would not be that much of a delay. Play has already stopped and if you had a system which cued up 5 second clips of all the angles it is only a minute or so delay for someone to watch them all even in slow motion. It takes that to prep for a penalty.

Next question being whether you want the ref or someone else to watch the video. The NFL/NHL have lots of problems but I think they get it right when it is the ref that is the reviewer. Less like he is being overuled, more like a tool of his job. Maintains his authority.

So put a booth in the tunnel and try that for a bit and see if we can work out solutions for other incidents.

Actually that is more the point than any use of video refereeing, yesterday all that would have happened is we would spent an extra 30 minutes or so sorting out the wrong decisions that idiot made yesterday if any Video Ref system was in place.

Quite clearly the officials gave something they didn't see so guessed and that is simply dishonest not a mistake, they simply need to be brought to book to ensure they control games in the future with a bit more integrity.

Perhaps a '2-appeal per team' system might work, just as in cricket. No one is going to use up an appeal over a dodgy outcome, but a team can use their appeals in cases where they definitively think they have a just cause. If they're right, then the decision is overturned, if they're wrong then they only have one appeal left.

Red cards, goals scored, penalties and perhaps free-kicks awarded are the obvious candidates for appeals. Not sure if there should be anything else. The bonus of this system for penalty appeals is that the onus will be on the person deemed to have committed the foul to come clean with their captain. No point in wasting an appeal. At the same time, the cheats are going to be found out too, and that can only be a good thing. I loathe someone being red-carded due to an oscar-winning performance by an opponent probably more than anything else.

A way to restart the game after an appeal is successful would have to be worked out. Clashing legs like hockey-sticks isn't going to work....

I understand the hassles with interrupting a flowing game, but surely at the same time we should be getting into an era of video review with the amount of money riding on the game? The view that the big clubs are important for the sport can be countered by the argument that the sport will gain more followers if cheating and poor decision-making is dealt with and the results even the field to the point where more clubs, and therefore more fans, actually get to like the game. Millions of pounds and euros now ride on the back of every game. To have one man making decisions that could cost some people their career, and some clubs their very existence is surely a joke in this age of the instant replay?

Even after today I'm still against video replays. I mean, people on here are still arguing the toss over the penalty decision today. There needs to be better referees rather than a complete overhaul of the process.

Whilst video reviews would sort out some clear cut decisions (e.g. today being a free kick rather than a penalty), how many decisions are still debatable after seeing a dozen replays from different angles?